Chandler Wilson 1RA Paper (First Draft) February 28, 2012 Thesis StatementExpressions are a huge part of how we define mood and outlook. Images that display expression can look into the differences of the positive and negative features. These photographs display children in dark times who have expressions of positive thoughts. The photographs show how children, naive as they may be, see positives and happy times where others see devastation and destruction. Through Helen Levitt's work we see this because her images present this positive look on life in the context of negative times.
February 23, 2012"Identify a Trend" Notes:Throughout these images the most basic concept that I see is child's play. To me this stood out as the first most outstanding theme that ran through the images. But as I have looked through them some more, I have noticed more details and other symbols that can play into deepening this concept. I believe that a running trend I want to use in analyzing these images is the idea behind the expressions children can have. To define this trend, I would that I want to pull all the images together through the expressive nature of children.In all of these images, the gestures and emotions of these children are out in the open, clear as day. Children don't tend to hide these things because they have not yet learned how evils come into play. Children, in a sense, where there emotions and thoughts on their sleeves.Starting with the first image, you can see it simply in the faces of the two children. They are playful, they are silly. And in the gestures, the little girl is twirling about and the young boy is moving as well (look closely at his left hand). These children are playing; all can be seen in the simple expressions they give.The second image plays more into gestures than into emotions seen on their faces. These boys are pushing at one another, they are climbing on the walls and playing on the roof. But if you know something about children (boys especially), they have what is called play faces. And this is an easy way to tell that fighting and rough housing is just for fun and not intended for anyone to actually get hurt. If you look closely at the boy on the rooftop getting punched, he is slightly smiling, even with his struggle. Rough housing is in the nature of children but through their expressions and lucid body movements, you can see that they are still playing.The final image presents children with what seems to be a laundry cart or something of that nature. The expressions and gestures are clear in this image and it is fun to imagine what they are thinking or looking at. However, we only have what we can see, to base the image off of. Starting with the little girl in the front, you see a big smile and her looking off to the left of the image. The little boy in the far left of the image is also looking in that direction and while it is less subtle, you can still see the trace of a smile on his face. The boy and the girl towards to right side of the image are also smiling. But the young boy is looking at the girl and biting his nails, a sign that he may be nervous around her and that he potentially likes her. Children don't hide their feelings well but sometimes that makes life simpler.The expressive nature of all of these children shows that children are honest with their emotions. They tend to show how they feel in their expressions as well as through their gestures. February 17, 2012Metaphor/Identification Notes:The first image of the little girl and little boy playing in the street, contains a metaphor that combines their atmosphere with the two of them. First, the children, outside of this context, would just be two young children playing together. Adding in the scene shows that they are playing in front of a row home in the city street. The little girl is shown in the light while the little boy is shown in the shadows of the building. This could symbolize how by her being white, she is given more privileges that he is. I think this photograph helps people to see what city living was like and how simple children can be.The second image includes young boys playing on the overhang of a rundown building. Outside of this scene, the boys may be seen play fighting with no more meaning to it than that. If you add in the background of the building and the boarded doors that show how the Depression hit the city. The children are playing around the city that is covered in desolation but they are still being children. I think that a metaphor in this photograph is that the children still find ways to enjoy life even when everything is being taken from them and when life isn't at a high point. Children are going to play whether the world is crumbling around them or not.The third image comes from a few years later than the first two. While the first two are from the 1940s and may shows the effects of the Great Depression, the third image is from the 1970s. These children are happy and playing just like the children in the previous two images. But when you incorporate the background you see that the city is still suffering; the graffiti in the background is a big clue. These children are moving a cart full of things along the street but they are also looking further down the road to somewhere that we, as the viewer, cannot see. The metaphor I see in this image is similar to the previous, no matter how bad things get, children are still happy with what they have. Sometimes not knowing that there is anything better keeps you moving forward because you aren't aware of what you are missing. These children are content with the life that they have, even with the destruction that they have seen.Ethos/Pathos Notes:For ethos of the first two images, I would say that it applies to these images in the sense that children are being exploited to show what city life is like. One could argue that it isn't fair to call on children's play to expose a whole way of life. As far as pathos is concerned, in the first image, the emotional appeal is within the children. They are just playing in the street, not worried about the differences between them; this is how things should be. Children should not be introduced to hatred but should instead be able to figure out what they want to believe about people on their own. Pathos in the second image, I believe comes from the fact that children are playing on an overhang. The children don't see this as a problem but the viewer should understand the depth of this. These children are playing up about 8 or 10 feet in the air, pushing one another around; to them it is just play. It shows the lack of parental supervision that these children have during the day. While parents are out, trying to earn a living to keep their children safe, the children are out on the streets playing in dangerous ways.The third image, I have chosen to keep separate from the other two because it comes from a later time. Ethos plays a role in this image in the sense that these children are alone on the streets, rolling a cart full of their belongings down the street. Is it right or fair that these children don't have an adult with them leading the way or helping them with the things? The viewer is being asked to think about if it is okay for some people to live this way when others have so much more... This ties into the emotional appeal (pathos) as well. I think that this image pulls at your feelings and asks you think about what you have and how different it is from what these children have. I think that this emotional appeal may be more for todays audience but I still think that it is a strong appeal. Maybe Helen Levitt wanted these images to become what they are today and to show the world what it was like to live at a different time. February 13, 2012Context Notes:Using the Rhetorical Triangle, the context of the image affects all three aspects of the photograph. First, I am going to talk about the photograph of the boy and girl playing in the street (the top photograph). I feel as though Helen Levitt's view on the photograph and what she wanted the viewer to see is clear. She took this photograph of children playing in the street. They are simple and don't really seem to notice that they are being recorded. From the Rhetor's end of the triangle, I would say that the photograph is suppose to portray that the life of children in the city is full of play. They are in the streets and it doesn't seem that any adults are there to supervise what goes on. I'm sure that the children are just playing outside of their homes; the front stoop is shown in the background to display that these children play outside of their homes without supervision but that adults may be close enough if something goes wrong. Helen Levitt shows that she isn't involved with these children's lives but that she just merely chose to photograph them. From the Audience's end of the triangle, I need to look at the photograph in two ways. First, the image was taken a number of years ago (1940s). I think that this audience, from the time the photograph was taken, will view the image in a sense that children are innocent. They play in the streets near their homes; they play together and don't worry about the views of the adults. Many children of this time came from homes where families were racist; this photograph shows that these children don't live in a world where the color of their skin matters. Obviously, the direct audience (the adults) is going to see the photograph and judge it how they will but the children don't see those same views. The second audience being addressed is now in 2012 when someone (myself) see the photograph today. When I view the photograph, I am given a sense of the simplicity of life that children live. They don't have any toys or other props, the children are playing with themselves. I think that it gives a real sense of the children and the way innocence plays a role into their lives. Finally, from the Text end of the triangle, I think that you need to look at all the difference aspects that play a role into how the photo is composed. First, the photograph is black and white, which was how most photographs were taken at the time, however we will look at one done by Helen Levitt that is done in color. I think that the way the light shines over the little girl could play into how the photograph is viewed; people see a white girl, dressed in light colors with the sun hitting her just right and then they see a black boy, in darker colored clothing, and he is in the shadows of the building. The way the light is only on the little girl play a huge role in how the photo is seen.The second photograph that I want to focus on is the one of the young boys playing on the building. Helen Levitt wanted to capture the essence of the city; the daily life that was not normally captured but defined who these people were. From the Rhetor's end of the triangle, I would say that the photograph does just that, it tells the story of these children as people who inhabit the city. The photograph is trying to show the violence that was involved in play; it was not serious but more a way for the children to imitate what they have seen. They are playing on the top of an overhang, this could be Helen Levitt's way of showing the carelessness and ease of being a child at play, while contrasting that with the type of play they are engaged in. From the Audience's end of the triangle, I again see the photograph from two different time periods. First, I see it today and how it is viewed in 2012; the audience is given a sense that play at the time of the photograph isn't much different than the play seen today. I say this because even though play may be more sheltered in today's society, it is still a form of expression used by children. The audience today may see their own past and their own play; it may pull together the past with the present. As for the Audience when the photograph was taken, I would say that they see the photograph symbolizes their lives... they saw in the photograph what they saw everyday. The children are imitating what they see in adults, they are playing in the streets, they are conforming to a way of life. At the other end of this would be people outside of the city who saw the photograph, I think that this photograph gives that audience a new view of life in the city; that it isn't all glamour and that it is in fact a rundown place with a hard economy too. Finally, from the Text end of the triangle, it is important to notice the rundown buildings that symbolize the city at this time. The economy was struggling and it took a toll on the city; this is shown through the background of the photograph. Another thing that I would look at is the way the children are playing. They aren't concerned that they are up on a rooftop, they are still playing violent games. Someone could get really hurt but these children don't see that; they see the city streets as their own personal playground.The third and final photograph is the only one in color that I have chosen to include. It has a group of children playing and looking at something in the distance. From the Rhetor's end of the triangle, I would say that Helen Levitt was again trying to show the simplicity of children's play. She was capturing them not looking at her but at something in the distance; she caught the children all smiling and giggly. From the Audience's end of the triangle, there are again two views. First, I want to address the audience from the photograph was taken. This audience will see their lives reflected back to them in the photograph. They children are a symbol for their lives and what living in this area is like. The audience is affected by seeing that children are happy to be there even in the tough times; children have a source of enthusiasm that cannot be taken as easily. I think the audience today, in 2012, will see something different in the photograph. They will see that children are alone and maybe moving their belongings in the cart in the middle. The photograph may elicit certain feelings for people who come from this era and are now seeing it again. The audience will see the innocence of children and how they were sometimes forced into roles that they were not ready for. Finally, from the Text end of the triangle, the photograph is the only one I have chosen to include that is in color. Of Helen Levitt's works, I found that most were in black and white, so I thought it would be important to also represent her colored photographs. This photograph shows the desolation of the city through the graffiti in the background; the children aren't affected by this and continue to be all smiles. Another aspect of the photograph that stands out to me is what is beyond our view; the children are all looking off the the left of the photograph to something that the viewer cannot see. February 8, 2012I have chosen these three photos from Helen Levitt's work. I feel that they really capture what she wanted: life in New York during the 1930s and 1940s. She has collections of photos on children's play; I have chosen just three of those images that I believe define her work.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/galleries/2009/03/31/photos-helen-levitt-1913-2009.slide11.html
New York, 1940s
This photo shows two children playing in the street. I believe that what Helen Levitt wanted to show was a side of New York that wasn't publicized; she wanted to show the daily life of the people who lived there. This photo captures child play. It shows the children having some sort of conversation and moving about, possibly playing a game. I hope to find out more about what Helen Levitt was trying to show through the use of children instead of adults.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/galleries/2009/03/31/photos-helen-levitt-1913-2009.slide10.html
New York, 1940s
This photo also shows children at play. It shows the rough housing of boys. It shows what the city looked like; slightly run down and a large play ground for the children. The boys are climbing on top of the overhang of the building; playing up there like it doesn't matter. It shows the carefree nature of children but also shows what the city is to the children.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/galleries/2009/03/31/photos-helen-levitt-1913-2009.slide13.html
New York, 1970s
I chosen to include this photograph because it was one of her images that is in color while still showing the life of children. Again I believe that this image shows how the city was seen as a place of play to the children. But it also shows the graffiti and the devastation that ran through the city at the time. The children seem happy and pleased with their play; but they seem to be looking off into the distance at something outside of the frame.
February 28, 2012
Thesis StatementExpressions are a huge part of how we define mood and outlook. Images that display expression can look into the differences of the positive and negative features. These photographs display children in dark times who have expressions of positive thoughts. The photographs show how children, naive as they may be, see positives and happy times where others see devastation and destruction. Through Helen Levitt's work we see this because her images present this positive look on life in the context of negative times.
February 23, 2012"Identify a Trend" Notes:Throughout these images the most basic concept that I see is child's play. To me this stood out as the first most outstanding theme that ran through the images. But as I have looked through them some more, I have noticed more details and other symbols that can play into deepening this concept. I believe that a running trend I want to use in analyzing these images is the idea behind the expressions children can have. To define this trend, I would that I want to pull all the images together through the expressive nature of children.In all of these images, the gestures and emotions of these children are out in the open, clear as day. Children don't tend to hide these things because they have not yet learned how evils come into play. Children, in a sense, where there emotions and thoughts on their sleeves.Starting with the first image, you can see it simply in the faces of the two children. They are playful, they are silly. And in the gestures, the little girl is twirling about and the young boy is moving as well (look closely at his left hand). These children are playing; all can be seen in the simple expressions they give.The second image plays more into gestures than into emotions seen on their faces. These boys are pushing at one another, they are climbing on the walls and playing on the roof. But if you know something about children (boys especially), they have what is called play faces. And this is an easy way to tell that fighting and rough housing is just for fun and not intended for anyone to actually get hurt. If you look closely at the boy on the rooftop getting punched, he is slightly smiling, even with his struggle. Rough housing is in the nature of children but through their expressions and lucid body movements, you can see that they are still playing.The final image presents children with what seems to be a laundry cart or something of that nature. The expressions and gestures are clear in this image and it is fun to imagine what they are thinking or looking at. However, we only have what we can see, to base the image off of. Starting with the little girl in the front, you see a big smile and her looking off to the left of the image. The little boy in the far left of the image is also looking in that direction and while it is less subtle, you can still see the trace of a smile on his face. The boy and the girl towards to right side of the image are also smiling. But the young boy is looking at the girl and biting his nails, a sign that he may be nervous around her and that he potentially likes her. Children don't hide their feelings well but sometimes that makes life simpler.The expressive nature of all of these children shows that children are honest with their emotions. They tend to show how they feel in their expressions as well as through their gestures.
February 17, 2012Metaphor/Identification Notes:The first image of the little girl and little boy playing in the street, contains a metaphor that combines their atmosphere with the two of them. First, the children, outside of this context, would just be two young children playing together. Adding in the scene shows that they are playing in front of a row home in the city street. The little girl is shown in the light while the little boy is shown in the shadows of the building. This could symbolize how by her being white, she is given more privileges that he is. I think this photograph helps people to see what city living was like and how simple children can be.The second image includes young boys playing on the overhang of a rundown building. Outside of this scene, the boys may be seen play fighting with no more meaning to it than that. If you add in the background of the building and the boarded doors that show how the Depression hit the city. The children are playing around the city that is covered in desolation but they are still being children. I think that a metaphor in this photograph is that the children still find ways to enjoy life even when everything is being taken from them and when life isn't at a high point. Children are going to play whether the world is crumbling around them or not.The third image comes from a few years later than the first two. While the first two are from the 1940s and may shows the effects of the Great Depression, the third image is from the 1970s. These children are happy and playing just like the children in the previous two images. But when you incorporate the background you see that the city is still suffering; the graffiti in the background is a big clue. These children are moving a cart full of things along the street but they are also looking further down the road to somewhere that we, as the viewer, cannot see. The metaphor I see in this image is similar to the previous, no matter how bad things get, children are still happy with what they have. Sometimes not knowing that there is anything better keeps you moving forward because you aren't aware of what you are missing. These children are content with the life that they have, even with the destruction that they have seen.Ethos/Pathos Notes:For ethos of the first two images, I would say that it applies to these images in the sense that children are being exploited to show what city life is like. One could argue that it isn't fair to call on children's play to expose a whole way of life. As far as pathos is concerned, in the first image, the emotional appeal is within the children. They are just playing in the street, not worried about the differences between them; this is how things should be. Children should not be introduced to hatred but should instead be able to figure out what they want to believe about people on their own. Pathos in the second image, I believe comes from the fact that children are playing on an overhang. The children don't see this as a problem but the viewer should understand the depth of this. These children are playing up about 8 or 10 feet in the air, pushing one another around; to them it is just play. It shows the lack of parental supervision that these children have during the day. While parents are out, trying to earn a living to keep their children safe, the children are out on the streets playing in dangerous ways.The third image, I have chosen to keep separate from the other two because it comes from a later time. Ethos plays a role in this image in the sense that these children are alone on the streets, rolling a cart full of their belongings down the street. Is it right or fair that these children don't have an adult with them leading the way or helping them with the things? The viewer is being asked to think about if it is okay for some people to live this way when others have so much more... This ties into the emotional appeal (pathos) as well. I think that this image pulls at your feelings and asks you think about what you have and how different it is from what these children have. I think that this emotional appeal may be more for todays audience but I still think that it is a strong appeal. Maybe Helen Levitt wanted these images to become what they are today and to show the world what it was like to live at a different time.
February 13, 2012Context Notes:Using the Rhetorical Triangle, the context of the image affects all three aspects of the photograph. First, I am going to talk about the photograph of the boy and girl playing in the street (the top photograph). I feel as though Helen Levitt's view on the photograph and what she wanted the viewer to see is clear. She took this photograph of children playing in the street. They are simple and don't really seem to notice that they are being recorded. From the Rhetor's end of the triangle, I would say that the photograph is suppose to portray that the life of children in the city is full of play. They are in the streets and it doesn't seem that any adults are there to supervise what goes on. I'm sure that the children are just playing outside of their homes; the front stoop is shown in the background to display that these children play outside of their homes without supervision but that adults may be close enough if something goes wrong. Helen Levitt shows that she isn't involved with these children's lives but that she just merely chose to photograph them. From the Audience's end of the triangle, I need to look at the photograph in two ways. First, the image was taken a number of years ago (1940s). I think that this audience, from the time the photograph was taken, will view the image in a sense that children are innocent. They play in the streets near their homes; they play together and don't worry about the views of the adults. Many children of this time came from homes where families were racist; this photograph shows that these children don't live in a world where the color of their skin matters. Obviously, the direct audience (the adults) is going to see the photograph and judge it how they will but the children don't see those same views. The second audience being addressed is now in 2012 when someone (myself) see the photograph today. When I view the photograph, I am given a sense of the simplicity of life that children live. They don't have any toys or other props, the children are playing with themselves. I think that it gives a real sense of the children and the way innocence plays a role into their lives. Finally, from the Text end of the triangle, I think that you need to look at all the difference aspects that play a role into how the photo is composed. First, the photograph is black and white, which was how most photographs were taken at the time, however we will look at one done by Helen Levitt that is done in color. I think that the way the light shines over the little girl could play into how the photograph is viewed; people see a white girl, dressed in light colors with the sun hitting her just right and then they see a black boy, in darker colored clothing, and he is in the shadows of the building. The way the light is only on the little girl play a huge role in how the photo is seen.The second photograph that I want to focus on is the one of the young boys playing on the building. Helen Levitt wanted to capture the essence of the city; the daily life that was not normally captured but defined who these people were. From the Rhetor's end of the triangle, I would say that the photograph does just that, it tells the story of these children as people who inhabit the city. The photograph is trying to show the violence that was involved in play; it was not serious but more a way for the children to imitate what they have seen. They are playing on the top of an overhang, this could be Helen Levitt's way of showing the carelessness and ease of being a child at play, while contrasting that with the type of play they are engaged in. From the Audience's end of the triangle, I again see the photograph from two different time periods. First, I see it today and how it is viewed in 2012; the audience is given a sense that play at the time of the photograph isn't much different than the play seen today. I say this because even though play may be more sheltered in today's society, it is still a form of expression used by children. The audience today may see their own past and their own play; it may pull together the past with the present. As for the Audience when the photograph was taken, I would say that they see the photograph symbolizes their lives... they saw in the photograph what they saw everyday. The children are imitating what they see in adults, they are playing in the streets, they are conforming to a way of life. At the other end of this would be people outside of the city who saw the photograph, I think that this photograph gives that audience a new view of life in the city; that it isn't all glamour and that it is in fact a rundown place with a hard economy too. Finally, from the Text end of the triangle, it is important to notice the rundown buildings that symbolize the city at this time. The economy was struggling and it took a toll on the city; this is shown through the background of the photograph. Another thing that I would look at is the way the children are playing. They aren't concerned that they are up on a rooftop, they are still playing violent games. Someone could get really hurt but these children don't see that; they see the city streets as their own personal playground.The third and final photograph is the only one in color that I have chosen to include. It has a group of children playing and looking at something in the distance. From the Rhetor's end of the triangle, I would say that Helen Levitt was again trying to show the simplicity of children's play. She was capturing them not looking at her but at something in the distance; she caught the children all smiling and giggly. From the Audience's end of the triangle, there are again two views. First, I want to address the audience from the photograph was taken. This audience will see their lives reflected back to them in the photograph. They children are a symbol for their lives and what living in this area is like. The audience is affected by seeing that children are happy to be there even in the tough times; children have a source of enthusiasm that cannot be taken as easily. I think the audience today, in 2012, will see something different in the photograph. They will see that children are alone and maybe moving their belongings in the cart in the middle. The photograph may elicit certain feelings for people who come from this era and are now seeing it again. The audience will see the innocence of children and how they were sometimes forced into roles that they were not ready for. Finally, from the Text end of the triangle, the photograph is the only one I have chosen to include that is in color. Of Helen Levitt's works, I found that most were in black and white, so I thought it would be important to also represent her colored photographs. This photograph shows the desolation of the city through the graffiti in the background; the children aren't affected by this and continue to be all smiles. Another aspect of the photograph that stands out to me is what is beyond our view; the children are all looking off the the left of the photograph to something that the viewer cannot see.
February 8, 2012I have chosen these three photos from Helen Levitt's work. I feel that they really capture what she wanted: life in New York during the 1930s and 1940s. She has collections of photos on children's play; I have chosen just three of those images that I believe define her work.
New York, 1940s
This photo shows two children playing in the street. I believe that what Helen Levitt wanted to show was a side of New York that wasn't publicized; she wanted to show the daily life of the people who lived there. This photo captures child play. It shows the children having some sort of conversation and moving about, possibly playing a game. I hope to find out more about what Helen Levitt was trying to show through the use of children instead of adults.
New York, 1940s
This photo also shows children at play. It shows the rough housing of boys. It shows what the city looked like; slightly run down and a large play ground for the children. The boys are climbing on top of the overhang of the building; playing up there like it doesn't matter. It shows the carefree nature of children but also shows what the city is to the children.
New York, 1970s
I chosen to include this photograph because it was one of her images that is in color while still showing the life of children. Again I believe that this image shows how the city was seen as a place of play to the children. But it also shows the graffiti and the devastation that ran through the city at the time. The children seem happy and pleased with their play; but they seem to be looking off into the distance at something outside of the frame.